Bio Balls

[yourockit]

It's called a 'denitrator', yourokit. You can buy them for $$$ or there are a few DIY plans out there in Interwebcyberspace, the tube has to be several times longer than Merbeast mentions I believe. They work by slowly flowing a portion of your tank water through the long tube coil until anaerobic bacteria colonies in the last 1/3 of the tube consume nitrates before the water is returned to the tank. The flow has to be drip-drip slow.

The dangers I have read, are not limited to, but include that they introduce toxic gases to your tank. I also believe they strip dissolved oxygen at the same time, hence why I won't use 'em.

If you would go through the trouble of setting one of these up, why not just DIY a constant flow water-change system?

Oh, and on-topic, I agree with Merbeast, increasing the surface area available for nitrifying bacteria could [if there was sufficient bioload to feed them] increase the size of the colony resulting in faster creation of Nitrates, necessitating MORE frequent water changes...

Due to restrictions imposed by apartment-mates, I cannot set up a diy water-change system.
~
But one would rather have nitrates in the tank than nitrites so increasing the surface area for nitrate creating bacteria is a good thing? More water-changes doesn't seem to be the likely outcome, but I'm not sure.
~
And as you mentioned, only so much bacteria can grow; only the amount that can be sustained by the amount of ammonia produced.

 

[yourockit]

Supposedlt mangroves work amazingly well in reducing nitrates. I have seen charts that supposedly depict amazing progress. But they tanke six months to become fully established. I do not really trust the methodology using by this fella in the link you sent. The way he seems to have his mangroves arranged is not according to the recomended way. also, he posted not pitcures of the growth of the pods themselves, nor did he post pics of the root systems and how they developed. I just don't know if his testing methodology was solid. I mean no offense, but....

 

[Trouble247]

Just get new room-mates...

By nitrifying I just meant more bacteria [both nitrite & nitrate producing] = Faster creation of NitrAte end product = Need for more frequent water changes... A biological filter is a balance, and sure it will self-regulate to an extent... but too little biomedia and your tank is always on the verge of a bad spike... Too much, and the bacteria would flourish and then starve in a continuing cycle, which in my opinion is just as unstable... I subscribe to the K.I.S.S. method of fishkeeping.

 

[yourockit]

Just get new room-mates...

By nitrifying I just meant more bacteria [both nitrite & nitrate producing] = Faster creation of NitrAte end product = Need for more frequent water changes...

is this a fact or conjecture? it doesn't really seem to make sense to me for three reasons; please see, thanks:

1.if the bacteria cannot grow because it cannot feed then how is it possible for the bacteria to somehow exist in too large of quantities which quicken the nitrate developing process?

2.
a.we want nitrates over nitrites.
b.nitrates are made in a process in which nitrites are converted to nitrates.
c.if the tank has too much bacteria to create nitrates then we have less nitrites (which is a good thing).

3.
a.the frequency of water-changes is determined by the amount of nitrates in water.
b.the amount of nitrates in the water is determined by the amount of nitrates that are being converted into nitrates.
c.the amount of nitrites in the water is determined by the amount of ammonia being realsed via fish waste.
d.therefore, the frequency of water-changes is ultimately dependent upon the amount of waste.
e.therefore, the amount of possible nitrates that can be created is dependent up the amount of bacteria which is dependent upon the amount of waste being produced by fishes.

 

[Trouble247]

I really don't want to hijack this thread yourockit... So this is it for me on this particular theme,

Technically we don't want nitrates either... and it could all be conjecture, or my misunderstanding of the process... But it's how I've kept my fish happy for quite some time. I do agree that the ultimately the water-changes should vary with changes in fish-

...Nitrification describes the entire process of amonia being converted first to NO2 and then on to NO3 and results from the combined efforts of the nitrosomonas and nitrobactors. The entire process is affected by changes in temperature, O2 levels, PH, and [bacterial] food levels... Other factors play in also, such as foreign contaminants, heavy metals, or chemicals present in the water.
Oxygen and alkalinity are also consumed during the process, and nitric acid is produced resulting in changes to the hardness and PH stability of your tank water...
It's an extremely dynamic system, ever changing. There is no bacterial apartied practiced amongst the nitrosonomas sp. and nitrobactors, they all live happily together in differing amounts on every surface in your tank, especially where there is O2 available in ready supply. The anaerobic boys that eat the nitrates are kept in the basement like Jodie Foster.
The growth/decline rates of the different bacterial colonies is dependent on many variable and interwoven factors, and it does react to them... But NOT instantly to changes in any one, or even several of them simultaneously. i.e. the instant disappearance of nitrosom.'s food does not instantaneously stop nitrobactor's reproductive cycle. I've fought enough bacterial blooms to believe this to be the case...

 

[Trouble247]

Crap... now I have to post again just to say that I meant "ultimately the water-changes should vary with changes in fish-"... "crap."

Peace out.

 

[yourockit]

Crap... now I have to post again just to say that I meant "ultimately the water-changes should vary with changes in fish-"... "crap."

Peace out.

haha bud, just trying to figure this out.

 

[yourockit]

I really don't want to hijack this thread yourockit... So this is it for me on this particular theme,

Technically we don't want nitrates either... and it could all be conjecture, or my misunderstanding of the process... But it's how I've kept my fish happy for quite some time. I do agree that the ultimately the water-changes should vary with changes in fish-

...Nitrification describes the entire process of amonia being converted first to NO2 and then on to NO3 and results from the combined efforts of the nitrosomonas and nitrobactors. The entire process is affected by changes in temperature, O2 levels, PH, and [bacterial] food levels... Other factors play in also, such as foreign contaminants, heavy metals, or chemicals present in the water.
Oxygen and alkalinity are also consumed during the process, and nitric acid is produced resulting in changes to the hardness and PH stability of your tank water...
It's an extremely dynamic system, ever changing. There is no bacterial apartied practiced amongst the nitrosonomas sp. and nitrobactors, they all live happily together in differing amounts on every surface in your tank, especially where there is O2 available in ready supply.
The anaerobic boys that eat the nitrates are kept in the basement like Jodie Foster.
The growth/decline rates of the different bacterial colonies is dependent on many variable and interwoven factors, and it does react to them... But NOT instantly to changes in any one, or even several of them simultaneously. i.e. the instant disappearance of nitrosom.'s food does not instantaneously stop nitrobactor's reproductive cycle. I've fought enough bacterial blooms to believe this to be the case...

I see, so though the different colonies of bacteria are involved in a directly proportional symbiotic relationship, this direct relationship can be thrown off-kilter when one type is, at a point in time, given opportunity to become larger in number than is sustainable. In this case, the bacterial bloom, such as a spike in nitrates, could take place before the different colonies of bacteria even themselves out and get back to normal.

In the short term a spike may occur, somehow, but in the long term the symbiotic bacterial relationship will even itself out so that nitrates cannot develop more quickly?

thanks

also, have you experienced this sort of nitrate spike?

 

[Wolf3101]

The number and frequancy of your water changes are going to depend on your bio-load and nothing else. In fact you can have a 100 gallon aquarium with a 500 gallon sump and 250 gallons of bio media on one wall and a 30 gallon tank with a single HOB filter on the other. Put ONE of the same fish in each tank and BOTH of the filter systems will have EXACTLY the same number of benificial bacteria.

Going LARGER...with more capacity will only increase your POTENTIAL...it won't increase the BB levels. With nothing to feed on..the collonies die back to the level the fish in the tank can support.

It sounds to me as if your OVER-complicating the process here. You already HAVE enough filtration in that tank. if you want a simple water change then run a hose from the FX5 drain port to the shower and another from the sink to the tank...

Nitrates can be slowed down with plants but you need a massive amount...it can be slowed down chemicly...Algone and the like...but it's expencive and only marganilly effective...and can even be helped with the addition of freshwater clams...HOWEVER it's still going to build up over time and you'll still have to do water changes.

My recomendation is regular and through testing...get yourself a TDS meter and a full test kit. Let THIS tell you when it's time for a water chance and NOT the so called common wisdom of "twice a week wether it needs it or not because the fish grow faster"

Thats a load of crap by the way. Fish grow no faster with twice weekly water changes than they do with BI monthly ones. It all has to do with having enough room in the tank for the fish...a proper diet...and good water conditions...